[serious] Off Topic Moderation Input - Part 2

[SlowwHand]

Why don't you have him send you a forwarding address instead?

[dannubis]

Well implication doesn't seem to work with Plomp, so you should be safe there...

[Maniac]

The link between IQ and theism is not nesecarily universal.

Example: South Korean Theistic Christians have a higher IQ than South Korean "Atheist" Buddhists.

Another unsound comment of our resident racist.

1) I said religion, not theism.

2) As an aside, an irrelevant comment though, many Buddhists basically treat Buddha as a god.

3) A local exception to a trend does not disprove the general correlation between IQ and atheism.

4) You have a history of making doubtful claims, so I'm not sure if I can even trust your assertion that South-Korean Christians have a higher IQ.

5) Even if that's a fact, there can be other historical or cultural factors leading to that connection, or christians could simply have, for whatever reason, a better socio-economic status, better education, which leads to better IQ scores. Also according to this wikipedia article, Christianity is viewed as more egalitarian and meritocratic than traditional Korean culture, something which in the past, when no one had ever heard of atheism before, would have attracted the intelletual elite. Do you have also have figures of *real* Korean atheists?

5) But most importantly, I didn't equate "mental handicap" to "low IQ". A high IQ persion who is good at abstract stuff like math and physics, but who is unable to apply logic and the scientific method to more concrete and real-life matters, who is for instance a racist, I would also call mentally handicapped.

[giblets]

Does anyone else find this comment racist?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost....29&postcount=5

Hey this is the age of Obama. Do you think he cares about the constitution? It was written by dead crackers.

[RGBVideo]

racist

facist

[dannubis]

Does anyone else find this comment racist?

http://apolyton.net/forums/showpost....29&postcount=5

Don't bother. Racism is implied by this statement, but it is not actually spelt out so it actually doesn't count.

[Robert]

I'm not sure what 'death crackers' exactly means.
Does this not only imply that Obama is a racist?

And for the record, hatefull implications about groups of people defined by sexual orientation, race, etc., are not acceptable either.

[SlowwHand]

Dead crackers, not death crackers. He means dead white people.

[Hauldren Collider]

Cracker is a slur against white people. It's equivalent to the n-word. I read that as rather racist myself, it is at best implying that Obama/black people in general don't care about white people.

[Jon Miller]

I don't think moderating DLs is interesting or worth doing.

JM

[ZEE]

As a 21 year veteran user of the internet, i can say that I think it all comes down to Admins having this sort of "Site Host" paranoia, thinking the Host (still The Planet now rite?) has this 'Big Brother' mentality and spying on them 24/7 and responding to the slightest complaint with the Fury of Zeus in a manner of seconds.

In practice, however, Site Hosts rarely get involved with client site's affairs, even in some extreme cases of 3rd party sites claiming the client site "invading" them or a few complaints of seriously innappropriate images or site content, least of all some joker making DL's.

So it basically comes down to how do you want your site to draw traffic which generates ad revenue without having thousands of people complaining about it (in which case the site host would take notice.)

[SlowwHand]

Cracker isn't really like ******. Blacks will call other blacks a ******, but whites don't call each other crackers. I think porch monkey is more the equivalent to cracker.

[Ming]

As a 21 year veteran user of the internet, i can say that I think it all comes down to Admins having this sort of "Site Host" paranoia, thinking the Host (still The Planet now rite?) has this 'Big Brother' mentality and spying on them 24/7 and responding to the slightest complaint with the Fury of Zeus in a manner of seconds.

In practice, however, Site Hosts rarely get involved with client site's affairs, even in some extreme cases of 3rd party sites claiming the client site "invading" them or a few complaints of seriously innappropriate images or site content, least of all some joker making DL's.

So it basically comes down to how do you want your site to draw traffic which generates ad revenue without having thousands of people complaining about it (in which case the site host would take notice.)

I'm sure this isn't even a consideration to the current owners.

[ZEE]

maybe not, but Plomp sure is sticking by DanQ's old rules (and I believe Dan to be heavily paranoid about the "family friendly" thing)

[Ming]

The "family thing" was a mark and dan thing... and it had nothing to do with the "hosts".

Our new owners kept what they liked, but made changes that dramatically shifted the tone of the OT.
Just compare the OT now to what it was under Mark/Dan, or even Dan/and gang. Big differences.